No re class movies and yes re how she was catapulted to fame but she is an extremely shrewd businesswoman and has been the face of internationally renowned make-up and perfume brands, and very successful swimwear ranges. She is a celeb for that, rather than her acting.
Bit like Cheryl Cole then, in a way, she has been very lucky. It isnt what you do or what you know, its who you know.
This seems to be CAN's latest thing,having there clients sound off on bigger celebrities(Kerry judging Kelly Brook's clothes,Peter giving an opinion about Liz).
Oh God, would this never-has-been please shut up about people who actually have careers. Liz has talent Andre, you get paid to write about her. Find a talent of your own please or go away for good!
So we're back to the usual then, attention seeking comments on the BIG story of the moment to get his name back out there? It would be less irritating if he refrained from using his favourite phrase "i cant comment on that im afraid" when it comes to his own personal life that occassionally hits the papers! :sleep:
His name has been 'out there' again for the past 7 years, and you think Pete isn't the only one who's paid to comment on the current BIG story?
She's in Hollywood films and known worldwide... PA has a few desperate housewife fans in the UK, I don't see how he compares with her.
She's been in many films, most of them have bombed. She hasn't had a hit film since the first Austin Powers movie which was in 1997. She's regularly slated by industry experts for her 'acting' and rightly so. She's one of the worst actresses there are. As I said in another thread, she's so bad, she could give Alex Reid a run for his money. She never really made it as an actress, only as a celebrity and Hugh Grant's OH.
And as for the desperate housewives quote YET AGAIN :yawn:, I'm a PA fan and I'm neither desperate, nor a housewife. Slate Peter for everything if you wish, but putting down the fans, some of who write on here, is just pathetic. Mind you, what with the usual barrell-scraping that goes on re Pete, I shouldn't be surprised.
Whether she has appeared in Hollywood films or not, imo does not make her talented. If she was such a good actress, why isn't she still doing these films?
Imo
, both her and PA have reached the peak of their careers and their popularity has waned, which is part of the course, but to call her talented is a bit far fetched. I found her acting extremely wooden and cringeworthy.
You're too kind. She couldn't act if her life depended upon it. Samantha Morton thinks so too!
As for why isn't she still doing films, it's because Hollywood don't want her. She's now too old for them, however, she'd still be working if she could act. They wanted her for her beauty when she was younger and her great body, and that was that.
Of course she knows who he is. She met him not so long ago, and even if she hadn't, she'd have to have been blind for the past 7 years not to have known about the Katie and Peter bandwagon.
Fashion icon is stretching it a bit but she has been one of the key faces of Estee Lauder for yonks and the difference between her and PA is that, like her or loathe her, she has an international profile and a number of very successful strings to her bow.
Is she a worse actress than PA is a singer? I'd say they're about equal in talent terms.
I think Pete has more talent than her, at least he can sing in tune. She couldn't act her way out of a paper bag.....or a plastic one for that matter.
Of course she knows who he is. She met him not so long ago, and even if she hadn't, she'd have to have been blind for the past 7 years not to have known about the Katie and Peter bandwagon.
I think Pete has more talent than her, at least he can sing in tune. She couldn't act her way out of a paper bag.....or a plastic one for that matter.
I wouldn't have thought Liz Hurley's lack of acting skills could provoke such passion. She's not famous because of her acting, as has already been pointed out numerous times on this and the other recent Liz Hurley threads. She is nevertheless much better known and infinitely more successful than PA could ever dream of being. That's what I and others are commenting on, PA desperately latching on to the latest news headliner to try and catch some of the spotlight. But if you want to keep on talking about her acting, although it's nothing to do with this, your perogative I guess...
If he had any class at all he would keep his column to the things going on in his life or commenting on things that he likes, not badmouthing real stars. Honestly, he's so bitchy, he's worse than a woman. When is everyone going to wake up and see him for the slimeball he is?
I wouldn't have thought Liz Hurley's lack of acting skills could provoke such passion. She's not famous because of her acting, as has already been pointed out numerous times on this and the other recent Liz Hurley threads. She is nevertheless much better known and infinitely more successful than PA could ever dream of being. That's what I and others are commenting on, PA desperately latching on to the latest news headliner to try and catch some of the spotlight. But if you want to keep on talking about her acting, although it's nothing to do with this, your perogative I guess...
Well, just think how passionate I would get if she COULD actually act.
Re the emboldened bit, yep.....and? Can I not mention it as well? Do things not get repeated ad nauseum re Peter Andre by various different posters?
As I said to someone else, PA is commenting on a story (which he's paid to do) which most other columnists have also commented on.
And, yep, thanks for letting me talk about Liz's acting or lack of it. Most kind. Do all threads stay 100% on topic? No, they don't.
This seems to be CAN's latest thing,having there clients sound off on bigger celebrities(Kerry judging Kelly Brook's clothes,Peter giving an opinion about Liz).
Its actually an old tactic used when a client of a PR company has something to promote. If it causes a spat then all the attention goes onto Zeleb (free advertising). Job done. Unfortunately most people are aware of the PR tricks and are just tired and embarrassed about them now.:)
And, yep, thanks for letting me talk about Liz's acting or lack of it. Most kind. Do all threads stay 100% on topic? No, they don't.
Nah, I didn't mean it like that, it was more that her bad acting is so universally recognised as bad that there's not too much new to say about how bad it is.
And mainly, that her fame/celebrity is not as a result of that aspect of her career.
Nah, I didn't mean it like that, it was more that her bad acting is so universally recognised as bad that there's not too much new to say about how bad it is.
And mainly, that her fame/celebrity is not as a result of that aspect of her career.
But look at the stuff's that's constantly repeated about Pete, and his ex for that matter! I don't see why I can't mention La Hurley's terrible acting, even if a few have mentioned it before me.
Well, just think how passionate I would get if she COULD actually act.
Re the emboldened bit, yep.....and? Can I not mention it as well? Do things not get repeated ad nauseum re Peter Andre by various different posters?
As I said to someone else, PA is commenting on a story (which he's paid to do) which most other columnists have also commented on.
And, yep, thanks for letting me talk about Liz's acting or lack of it. Most kind. Do all threads stay 100% on topic? No, they don't.
Sure does Rose Petals and sure will, forever and ever and ever and ever...and it is a forum and because it is a forum you can do that willy nilly.
PA/KP/KK threads go off topic (as do many others) without fail. If they did not all threads would be very restricted and not really have much content or interesting comments, as with anything being discussed or debated face to face, who puts a limit on what are restricted in saying? Even if repetitive, there are different ways of saying something and sometimes repetition is needed just to reinforce something.
I never really understood someone posting "you are going off topic" it is not against forum rules nor real life custom. When you speak you speak and it is the interesting turns, nooks and crannies, that make a topic interesting. IMO. :)
I think the majority of you are missing my point. Whether Liz has actual talent or not, that's objective, but what she does have is a career that doesn't rely on whether people like her or not. So she doesn't act as much any more, but she's done a lot of campaigns for different brands and worked successfully (in terms of money) in film and fashion. PA has not been successful in an art, and without his weekly column, brandishing his kids about in his ITV fly on the wall show and a few presenting jobs here and there, his music wouldn't sell at all. Considering he can't get a number one with the amount of exposure he has, it's actually quite laughable.
Sure does Rose Petals and sure will, forever and ever and ever and ever...and it is a forum and because it is a forum you can do that willy nilly.
PA/KP/KK threads go off topic (as do many others) without fail. If they did not all threads would be very restricted and not really have much content or interesting comments, as with anything being discussed or debated face to face, who puts a limit on what are restricted in saying?
I never really understood someone posting "you are going off topic" it is not against forum rules nor real life custom. When you speak you speak and it is the interesting turns, nooks and crannies, that make a topic interesting. IMO. :)
Yes, I agree although I do believe in basically sticking to the topic, and I was! Someone said Liz Hurley was talented and I had to object!!
I think the majority of you are missing my point. Whether Liz has actual talent or not, that's objective, but what she does have is a career that doesn't rely on whether people like her or not. So she doesn't act as much any more, but she's done a lot of campaigns for different brands and worked successfully (in terms of money) in film and fashion. PA has not been successful in an art, and without his weekly column, brandishing his kids about in his ITV fly on the wall show and a few presenting jobs here and there, his music wouldn't sell at all. Considering he can't get a number one with the amount of exposure he has, it's actually quite laughable.
That's sort of like that joke "What did the Romans do for us?"...and I do think you are minimising his actual career here as you have missed out the shows (Strictly Dancing), interviews, his tours, etc, etc.
I think the majority of you are missing my point. Whether Liz has actual talent or not, that's objective, but what she does have is a career that doesn't rely on whether people like her or not. So she doesn't act as much any more, but she's done a lot of campaigns for different brands and worked successfully (in terms of money) in film and fashion. PA has not been successful in an art, and without his weekly column, brandishing his kids about in his ITV fly on the wall show and a few presenting jobs here and there, his music wouldn't sell at all. Considering he can't get a number one with the amount of exposure he has, it's actually quite laughable.
I'm afraid it isn't. She's a terrible actress, period. Anyone can see when someone CAN'T act. Great acting isn't objective, so why should bad acting be? For example, no one in their right mind is going to say that Robert De Niro or Helen Mirren can't act. You may not like their style of acting but they CAN act, just like Ms Hurley CAN'T act.
Yes, she has worldwide renown, whereas Pete's only known here, in Australia and maybe a few European countries, but I don't understand?? Does that mean he can't comment on her then...because she's A List and he's D List??
And of course Pete's been successful.....not mega successful but he's still had success. He wouldn't be a millionnaire if he wasn't successful. His perfumes and books sell very well, as do his concerts. He's had mediocre success with his songs, several of his albums have gone Gold. So he can't hit no.1 with his songs; neither does Ms Hurley hit no.1 with her films!
That's sort of like that joke "What did the Romans do for us?"...and I do think you are minimising his actual career here as you have missed out the shows, his tours, etc, etc.
Which wouldn't sell without the rest...
Do you think the people that go to Katie Price's book signings appreciate her as an author?
I think the majority of you are missing my point. Whether Liz has actual talent or not, that's objective, but what she does have is a career that doesn't rely on whether people like her or not. So she doesn't act as much any more, but she's done a lot of campaigns for different brands and worked successfully (in terms of money) in film and fashion. PA has not been successful in an art, and without his weekly column, brandishing his kids about in his ITV fly on the wall show and a few presenting jobs here and there, his music wouldn't sell at all. Considering he can't get a number one with the amount of exposure he has, it's actually quite laughable.
I get your point and concur. IMO as a stand alone he has know credibility so he has to try very hard to remain current. Liz is on topic at the moment so easy pray, IMO he couldn't care two hoots who she is sleeping with. He really has nothing else to talk about in his column, which is sad because he could have mentioned his disgust at Frank Boyle.
Do you think the people that go to Katie Price's book signings appreciate her as an author?
Sadly, yes, I think some of her fans do, or they certainly sound like it.
And Ms Hurley wouldn't have sold anything either, or got cast in some A list movies, had she not turned up to the premiere of Hugh Grant's 4 Weddings & A Funeral Film in THAT dress! Before she did that, very few people knew who she was.
I'm afraid it isn't. She's a terrible actress, period. Anyone can see when someone CAN'T act. Great acting isn't objective, so why should bad acting be? For example, no one in their right mind is going to say that Robert De Niro or Helen Mirren can't act. You may not like their style of acting but they CAN act, just like Ms Hurley CAN'T act.
Yes, she has worldwide renown, whereas Pete's only known here, in Australia and maybe a few European countries, but I don't understand?? Does that mean he can't comment on her then...because she's A List and he's D List??
And of course Pete's been successful.....not mega successful but he's still had success. He wouldn't be a millionnaire if he wasn't successful. His perfumes and books sell very well, as do his concerts. He's had mediocre success with his songs, several of his albums have gone Gold. So he can't hit no.1 with his songs; neither does Ms Hurley hit no.1 with her films!
Which started with the pin dress and then escalated on the media coverage of Hugh and Brown and the world wondering what Liz was going to do to Hugh. :eek:
I'm afraid it isn't. She's a terrible actress, period. Anyone can see when someone CAN'T act. Great acting isn't objective, so why should bad acting be? For example, no one in their right mind is going to say that Robert De Niro or Helen Mirren can't act. You may not like their style of acting but they CAN act, just like Ms Hurley CAN'T act.
Yes, she has worldwide renown, whereas Pete's only known here, in Australia and maybe a few European countries, but I don't understand?? Does that mean he can't comment on her then...because she's A List and he's D List??
It doesn't mean he can't comment on her, it means that she's above him in star status and has achieved a lot more in her career than he has, so he should be respectful of that and not make snidey comments about her private life in a gossip rag.
Liz Hurley can act, she's not a great actress, but she CAN act, she's just been in a load of awful roles. How is it relevent to this discussion, anyway? My point is that Hurley has a 'talent' and a career and works on those, without stepping on other people's toes and having to comment on public relationships. Pete... Not so much.
But look at the stuff's that's constantly repeated about Pete, and his ex for that matter! I don't see why I can't mention La Hurley's terrible acting, even if a few have mentioned it before me.
Eh?? At no point did I say you couldn't. I said your perogative to talk about whatever you want. Is it really so hard for you to see the context of my comment repeated below??
1.She's not famous because of her acting.
2. She is much better known and infinitely more successful than PA could ever dream of being.
3. That's what I and others are commenting on, PA desperately latching on to the latest news headliner to try and catch some of the spotlight.
Which bit of the above do I need to explain? It all seems pretty self-explanatory to me.
Comments
Bit like Cheryl Cole then, in a way, she has been very lucky. It isnt what you do or what you know, its who you know.
Ah right, thanks.
You don't say!
At what? Not acting, that's for sure.
His name has been 'out there' again for the past 7 years, and you think Pete isn't the only one who's paid to comment on the current BIG story?
She's been in many films, most of them have bombed. She hasn't had a hit film since the first Austin Powers movie which was in 1997. She's regularly slated by industry experts for her 'acting' and rightly so. She's one of the worst actresses there are. As I said in another thread, she's so bad, she could give Alex Reid a run for his money. She never really made it as an actress, only as a celebrity and Hugh Grant's OH.
And as for the desperate housewives quote YET AGAIN :yawn:, I'm a PA fan and I'm neither desperate, nor a housewife. Slate Peter for everything if you wish, but putting down the fans, some of who write on here, is just pathetic. Mind you, what with the usual barrell-scraping that goes on re Pete, I shouldn't be surprised.
You're too kind. She couldn't act if her life depended upon it. Samantha Morton thinks so too!
As for why isn't she still doing films, it's because Hollywood don't want her. She's now too old for them, however, she'd still be working if she could act. They wanted her for her beauty when she was younger and her great body, and that was that.
Of course she knows who he is. She met him not so long ago, and even if she hadn't, she'd have to have been blind for the past 7 years not to have known about the Katie and Peter bandwagon.
I think Pete has more talent than her, at least he can sing in tune. She couldn't act her way out of a paper bag.....or a plastic one for that matter.
I wouldn't have thought Liz Hurley's lack of acting skills could provoke such passion. She's not famous because of her acting, as has already been pointed out numerous times on this and the other recent Liz Hurley threads. She is nevertheless much better known and infinitely more successful than PA could ever dream of being. That's what I and others are commenting on, PA desperately latching on to the latest news headliner to try and catch some of the spotlight. But if you want to keep on talking about her acting, although it's nothing to do with this, your perogative I guess...
Meeeeeowwww.
Well, just think how passionate I would get if she COULD actually act.
Re the emboldened bit, yep.....and? Can I not mention it as well? Do things not get repeated ad nauseum re Peter Andre by various different posters?
As I said to someone else, PA is commenting on a story (which he's paid to do) which most other columnists have also commented on.
And, yep, thanks for letting me talk about Liz's acting or lack of it. Most kind. Do all threads stay 100% on topic? No, they don't.
Its actually an old tactic used when a client of a PR company has something to promote. If it causes a spat then all the attention goes onto Zeleb (free advertising). Job done. Unfortunately most people are aware of the PR tricks and are just tired and embarrassed about them now.:)
Nah, I didn't mean it like that, it was more that her bad acting is so universally recognised as bad that there's not too much new to say about how bad it is.
And mainly, that her fame/celebrity is not as a result of that aspect of her career.
But look at the stuff's that's constantly repeated about Pete, and his ex for that matter! I don't see why I can't mention La Hurley's terrible acting, even if a few have mentioned it before me.
Sure does Rose Petals and sure will, forever and ever and ever and ever...and it is a forum and because it is a forum you can do that willy nilly.
PA/KP/KK threads go off topic (as do many others) without fail. If they did not all threads would be very restricted and not really have much content or interesting comments, as with anything being discussed or debated face to face, who puts a limit on what are restricted in saying? Even if repetitive, there are different ways of saying something and sometimes repetition is needed just to reinforce something.
I never really understood someone posting "you are going off topic" it is not against forum rules nor real life custom. When you speak you speak and it is the interesting turns, nooks and crannies, that make a topic interesting. IMO.
Yes, I agree although I do believe in basically sticking to the topic, and I was! Someone said Liz Hurley was talented and I had to object!!
That's sort of like that joke "What did the Romans do for us?"...and I do think you are minimising his actual career here as you have missed out the shows (Strictly Dancing), interviews, his tours, etc, etc.
I'm afraid it isn't. She's a terrible actress, period. Anyone can see when someone CAN'T act. Great acting isn't objective, so why should bad acting be? For example, no one in their right mind is going to say that Robert De Niro or Helen Mirren can't act. You may not like their style of acting but they CAN act, just like Ms Hurley CAN'T act.
Yes, she has worldwide renown, whereas Pete's only known here, in Australia and maybe a few European countries, but I don't understand?? Does that mean he can't comment on her then...because she's A List and he's D List??
And of course Pete's been successful.....not mega successful but he's still had success. He wouldn't be a millionnaire if he wasn't successful. His perfumes and books sell very well, as do his concerts. He's had mediocre success with his songs, several of his albums have gone Gold. So he can't hit no.1 with his songs; neither does Ms Hurley hit no.1 with her films!
Which wouldn't sell without the rest...
Do you think the people that go to Katie Price's book signings appreciate her as an author?
Who does he think he is Kim Marsh??!:D;)
And you know this as a fact because????
He has an already established fanbase.
I get your point and concur. IMO as a stand alone he has know credibility so he has to try very hard to remain current. Liz is on topic at the moment so easy pray, IMO he couldn't care two hoots who she is sleeping with. He really has nothing else to talk about in his column, which is sad because he could have mentioned his disgust at Frank Boyle.
No he's leading up to that Lisa.
Sadly, yes, I think some of her fans do, or they certainly sound like it.
And Ms Hurley wouldn't have sold anything either, or got cast in some A list movies, had she not turned up to the premiere of Hugh Grant's 4 Weddings & A Funeral Film in THAT dress! Before she did that, very few people knew who she was.
Which started with the pin dress and then escalated on the media coverage of Hugh and Brown and the world wondering what Liz was going to do to Hugh. :eek:
It doesn't mean he can't comment on her, it means that she's above him in star status and has achieved a lot more in her career than he has, so he should be respectful of that and not make snidey comments about her private life in a gossip rag.
Liz Hurley can act, she's not a great actress, but she CAN act, she's just been in a load of awful roles. How is it relevent to this discussion, anyway? My point is that Hurley has a 'talent' and a career and works on those, without stepping on other people's toes and having to comment on public relationships. Pete... Not so much.
Eh?? At no point did I say you couldn't. I said your perogative to talk about whatever you want. Is it really so hard for you to see the context of my comment repeated below??
1.She's not famous because of her acting.
2. She is much better known and infinitely more successful than PA could ever dream of being.
3. That's what I and others are commenting on, PA desperately latching on to the latest news headliner to try and catch some of the spotlight.
Which bit of the above do I need to explain? It all seems pretty self-explanatory to me.